Bree Mobley, Annotation #3
“Blue Gold: World Water Wars”
14 October 2011
1207 words
“Blue Gold: World Water Wars”, directed by Sam Bozzo, released in 2008
“Blue Gold” is a documentary that examines the environmental and political implications of the planet’s dwindling water supply. It predicts that in the future there will be wars fought over the ownership of water. It talks about water as a private commodity versus a municipality and public right.
“Blue Gold” presents its viewers many different angles in regards to a diminishing water supply. First off, the film talks about the current façade of the cyclic water cycle. Yes, the water cycle would normally replenish itself, equally distributing water between land, ocean, and sky. However, with the industrialization of the 20th and 21st centuries, that replenishment is disrupted. With humans causing heavily polluted water ways, impermeable surfaces like asphalt, the destruction of wetlands, and the over-mining to ground water, the cycle cannot even begin to sustain our demand. The movie also talks about the privatization of water. Examples of large water corporations in places like France and Sweden privatizing water allow the film to speak ominously about the potential corruption and abuse that could result of this. Lastly the film talks about regions that will soon be experiences extreme difficulty in attaining access to water. Places like Los Angeles who, for the past 60 years has relied heavily, if not solely, dams and irrigation to bring water from the Colorado River to the greater Los Angeles County. The film suggests that the most successful and prosperous areas will no longer be characterized by just their economic ability, but rather their natural abundance of water. Places like the Northeast will be better off than the Southwest due to this thought.
The film draws out Political, Economic, Ecological, and Organizational sustainability problems. One example of the political problem is the privatization of water. Large water cartels, such as Suez or Veolla, have taken control of water distribution. This paves the way for much corruption. These large companies can sell access to water to poorer countries so that water no longer becomes a basic right but rather a commodity given only to those who can afford it. And who can possibly set a price on something that people cannot live without. Many country’s leaders were arrested or driven from office due to angry mobs for allowing the large water cartels to privatize their country’s access to water. An example of an Ecological issue can be seen in Mexico. The film talked briefly about an area of Mexico, bordering the United States, where the water in a river is near fatal if submerged in. Due to pollution from hospitals, schools, and industry, the water is guarded by border control police and not even touched. Now this water is then being evaporated or released into the ground and used to water crops. The pollutants in the water are now saturating crops and finding their way into the country’s food source.
The part of the film I found most compelling was the discussion of the thousands of dams that have been built worldwide and the disruption they really do cause. Dams not only stop the flow of a natural water source, they cause stagnation in the water they hold back. This increases the temperature of the water and allows for more algae to grow. This in turn increases the oxygen content of the water which is detrimental to many species living in the water and also to the surrounding ecosystem. There are also negative effects to the land and habitats that are no longer being reached by the water that is now held behind a dam. Entire ecosystems can be destroyed due to this. The film said there are more than 50,000 large dams worldwide. Dams also provide water to places that normally wouldn’t have access to such. Los Angeles is a prime example. The population of LA County, and Orange and San Diego Country for that matter would never have been able to reach the population they hold today if not for a series of dams that hold back and redirect water away from its natural course and towards the coastline of California. Now, millions of people are dependent upon a water source that is hundreds of miles away. The disconnect between source and use causes an educational gap between the consumer and the consumption.
The part of the film I found least compelling was the evidence provided on the subject of beverage companies. The film talked about Coca-Cola having a huge presence in Mexico. Dasani, the water product of Coca-Cola is erroneously bottled and priced. The clips of interviews with the liaisons for Coca-Cola and beverage companies of the like were unimpressive and unconvincing. They claimed that privatization of water in communities would help alleviate water quality issues and community access to water issues. However, it was completely unconvincing.
I think this film best addresses people who are aware of the growing water problem and who are willing to take action. It really addresses every individual person, in an ideal case. It is the responsibility of individuals to become aware of where your water is coming from and how it gets to you. And also to be aware that a problem and crisis does exist and should not be taken lightly. Conservation is what each person should be thinking
The film suggests that individuals can help to solve the water crisis. To do this, people can choose to live off of a food source that is not dependent on global trade. This way, the water that nurtures their food comes from a local source and has not chance of being priced, exploited, or polluted elsewhere. Also, people when making a choice to relocate can think now of populations in relation to amount of water resources. It does not makes sense to relocate to a desert, there are no natural water sources for a desert, or at least not enough to sustain a large population of humans.
This filmed encouraged me to look up my local watersheds and become more aware of where my water comes from and how it gets to me. I am from Southern California and have always been acutely aware of where my town’s water comes from. Maybe because the possibility of drought is high and the knowledge of LA outside water source is relatively widespread. Plus, I see on of the main water line that provides the city of Los Angeles with water every time I drive on the freeway. My town’s water comes from Lake Castaic, a man-operated lake and dam located approximately 45 minutes north of my house and Lake Powell, located on the border of California and Arizona. Upon revisiting this knowledge, I further looking into Los Angeles’ water supply and researched the MWD, or Metropolitan Water District, the corporation in charge of most all of Southern California’s water distribution. After watching this film, I also wanted to look up Troy’s local watershed and water sources. Troy’s watershed is called Middle Hudson and there are approximately 23 citizen groups that work to protect it. "Metropolitan Water District of Southern California." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. 14 Oct. 2011. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Water_District_of_Southern_California>. "Hudson River Estuary Program." Department of Environmental Conservation. New York State. Web. 14 Oct. 2011. <http://www.dec.ny.gov/lands/4920.html>.
“Blue Gold: World Water Wars”
14 October 2011
1207 words
“Blue Gold: World Water Wars”, directed by Sam Bozzo, released in 2008
“Blue Gold” is a documentary that examines the environmental and political implications of the planet’s dwindling water supply. It predicts that in the future there will be wars fought over the ownership of water. It talks about water as a private commodity versus a municipality and public right.
“Blue Gold” presents its viewers many different angles in regards to a diminishing water supply. First off, the film talks about the current façade of the cyclic water cycle. Yes, the water cycle would normally replenish itself, equally distributing water between land, ocean, and sky. However, with the industrialization of the 20th and 21st centuries, that replenishment is disrupted. With humans causing heavily polluted water ways, impermeable surfaces like asphalt, the destruction of wetlands, and the over-mining to ground water, the cycle cannot even begin to sustain our demand. The movie also talks about the privatization of water. Examples of large water corporations in places like France and Sweden privatizing water allow the film to speak ominously about the potential corruption and abuse that could result of this. Lastly the film talks about regions that will soon be experiences extreme difficulty in attaining access to water. Places like Los Angeles who, for the past 60 years has relied heavily, if not solely, dams and irrigation to bring water from the Colorado River to the greater Los Angeles County. The film suggests that the most successful and prosperous areas will no longer be characterized by just their economic ability, but rather their natural abundance of water. Places like the Northeast will be better off than the Southwest due to this thought.
The film draws out Political, Economic, Ecological, and Organizational sustainability problems. One example of the political problem is the privatization of water. Large water cartels, such as Suez or Veolla, have taken control of water distribution. This paves the way for much corruption. These large companies can sell access to water to poorer countries so that water no longer becomes a basic right but rather a commodity given only to those who can afford it. And who can possibly set a price on something that people cannot live without. Many country’s leaders were arrested or driven from office due to angry mobs for allowing the large water cartels to privatize their country’s access to water. An example of an Ecological issue can be seen in Mexico. The film talked briefly about an area of Mexico, bordering the United States, where the water in a river is near fatal if submerged in. Due to pollution from hospitals, schools, and industry, the water is guarded by border control police and not even touched. Now this water is then being evaporated or released into the ground and used to water crops. The pollutants in the water are now saturating crops and finding their way into the country’s food source.
The part of the film I found most compelling was the discussion of the thousands of dams that have been built worldwide and the disruption they really do cause. Dams not only stop the flow of a natural water source, they cause stagnation in the water they hold back. This increases the temperature of the water and allows for more algae to grow. This in turn increases the oxygen content of the water which is detrimental to many species living in the water and also to the surrounding ecosystem. There are also negative effects to the land and habitats that are no longer being reached by the water that is now held behind a dam. Entire ecosystems can be destroyed due to this. The film said there are more than 50,000 large dams worldwide. Dams also provide water to places that normally wouldn’t have access to such. Los Angeles is a prime example. The population of LA County, and Orange and San Diego Country for that matter would never have been able to reach the population they hold today if not for a series of dams that hold back and redirect water away from its natural course and towards the coastline of California. Now, millions of people are dependent upon a water source that is hundreds of miles away. The disconnect between source and use causes an educational gap between the consumer and the consumption.
The part of the film I found least compelling was the evidence provided on the subject of beverage companies. The film talked about Coca-Cola having a huge presence in Mexico. Dasani, the water product of Coca-Cola is erroneously bottled and priced. The clips of interviews with the liaisons for Coca-Cola and beverage companies of the like were unimpressive and unconvincing. They claimed that privatization of water in communities would help alleviate water quality issues and community access to water issues. However, it was completely unconvincing.
I think this film best addresses people who are aware of the growing water problem and who are willing to take action. It really addresses every individual person, in an ideal case. It is the responsibility of individuals to become aware of where your water is coming from and how it gets to you. And also to be aware that a problem and crisis does exist and should not be taken lightly. Conservation is what each person should be thinking
The film suggests that individuals can help to solve the water crisis. To do this, people can choose to live off of a food source that is not dependent on global trade. This way, the water that nurtures their food comes from a local source and has not chance of being priced, exploited, or polluted elsewhere. Also, people when making a choice to relocate can think now of populations in relation to amount of water resources. It does not makes sense to relocate to a desert, there are no natural water sources for a desert, or at least not enough to sustain a large population of humans.
This filmed encouraged me to look up my local watersheds and become more aware of where my water comes from and how it gets to me. I am from Southern California and have always been acutely aware of where my town’s water comes from. Maybe because the possibility of drought is high and the knowledge of LA outside water source is relatively widespread. Plus, I see on of the main water line that provides the city of Los Angeles with water every time I drive on the freeway. My town’s water comes from Lake Castaic, a man-operated lake and dam located approximately 45 minutes north of my house and Lake Powell, located on the border of California and Arizona. Upon revisiting this knowledge, I further looking into Los Angeles’ water supply and researched the MWD, or Metropolitan Water District, the corporation in charge of most all of Southern California’s water distribution. After watching this film, I also wanted to look up Troy’s local watershed and water sources. Troy’s watershed is called Middle Hudson and there are approximately 23 citizen groups that work to protect it.
"Metropolitan Water District of Southern California." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. 14 Oct. 2011. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Water_District_of_Southern_California>.
"Hudson River Estuary Program." Department of Environmental Conservation. New York State. Web. 14 Oct. 2011. <http://www.dec.ny.gov/lands/4920.html>.